This is the opinion of BI researcher Espen Henriksen, who has looked at the list of the share transactions of the husband of the foreign minister. The husband of the foreign minister often bought and sold Norwegian shares, including in weapons or salmon companies, while the government knew about secrets that could affect the value. – As a potential insider case, this case appears far more serious than the Borten Moe case, says Henriksen. Huitfeldt tells news that it is up to someone other than her to decide. Økokrim denied in a press release on Wednesday that they had evidence to investigate the case. Foreign Minister Anniken Huitfeldt (Ap) also explained on Thursday that she does not reveal secrets to anyone. – I never talk to my husband or anyone else about matters that could have an impact on the prices for buying and selling shares on Oslo Børs, she stressed. Unknowingly incompetentAnniken Huitfeldt has broken the government’s competence rules. Even though her husband’s share purchase has been unknown to her, she herself has not fulfilled the responsibility of acquiring all knowledge that could affect her competence. It is she herself who, just too late, has brought presented this information and gave it to the civil service, the prime minister and the press. Both she herself and the prime minister believe she can continue in her job as foreign minister. It is difficult to understand how Huitfeldt did not even from day one demand a list of the individual shares from her husband. It seems as whether the husband wanted to have watertight bulkheads between the Minister for Foreign Affairs and his own investments to avoid problems of integrity. There is a wrong perception of the regulations. The Minister for Foreign Affairs must know in order to be able to act in line with the regulations. To deny her knowledge is to make the situation worse, not better, even if it is done in good faith. Since this is far from the first competency case for the Støre government, the case becomes more serious than itself. It underpins the impression of a cultural problem and too little awareness of the regulations. Therefore, this is a scratch in the paint for more than Huitfeldt. The prime minister, the party and the government as a whole are also affected. It is therefore extremely important that this case becomes part of the control committee’s review of how this and previous governments work with integrity. Huitfeldt has not been able to enrich herself with the knowledge she did not have. That distinguishes the case from Ola Borten Moe, who could potentially use knowledge for his own gain. She has not been able to know about her ties, that distinguishes the case from the cases of Brenna and Trettebergstuen who knew about their direct and indirect ties. The fact that all the competency cases are different strengthens the impression that the overall awareness of competency cases is too poor. It may also be the case in previous governments. It is right that the Control Committee is also looking at this. That the Labor Party gets another competency case in the important election campaign rush is extra devastating. It potentially destroys the opportunities of completely innocent local politicians who lose positions and power in their local everyday life far away from the government’s innermost circles. – Makes very little financial sense Ola Borten Moe (Sp) resigned as minister this summer. He only kept to buying stocks to save for the long term, according to himself. It looks like a sensible way to get a return, according to Henriksen. While the Huitfeldt case looks less confidence-inspiring because the husband buys and sells shares often, explains Henriksen. – Her husband apparently acted actively. He bought shares which he held for a very short period of time before selling them. Both financial and empirical theory say that such a strategy makes very little economic sense if you do not have an informational advantage, such as inside information, says Henriksen. Such secrets about companies will be much more valuable if they are misused for quick purchases after news is released, while the gain is almost negligible for long-term investments as in Borten Moe’s case, according to Henriksen, who gives an example: If you buy shares to own them on term, let’s say 20 years, a share rise of 2 percent after a news item will give 0.1 percentage point extra gain each year. But for the frequent shopper, the news is worth much more. – If you know about these 2 percent, and want to sell out within a week, this would mean getting a return of well over 100 percent within a year if you take advantage of the information advantage. So it is far rougher, says Henriksen. Not unusual among private savers The banks find that many Norwegians sell and buy shares frequently, like the foreign minister’s husband, according to Nordnet’s investment economist Mads Johannesen. He has looked at the list of transactions for his husband, and sees nothing suspicious about the transactions, which are mostly between NOK 15,000 and 70,000. Investment economist Mads Johannesen at Nordnet. Photo: Nordnet – This is a normal private saver that is somewhat active in the stock market. The sums are also not so high that you can ask questions or that there is something abnormal compared to the average Norwegian, he says to news.
ttn-69
– Potentially far more serious than the Borten Moe case – news Norway – Overview of news from different parts of the country
